Volume 1, Issue 1
October 2005
Bureau of Land Management
SEIS Project
Newsletter
Supplemental EIS Being Prepared for CBNG
Special
points of
interest:
• Statewide
Record Of
Decision signed
April 2003
• Court ordered
SEIS April 5,
2005
• 555 CBNG
producing wells
currently in
Montana
• 18,225 Predicted federal,
state & private
CBNG wells
(2003 FEIS
RFD)
Inside this issue:
Planning Area
2
Collaboration
2
Alternative
3
Watersheds
6
Comments
7
Schedule
7
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has embarked on
a project to supplement the 2003 Montana Statewide Final
Oil and Gas EIS and Amendment of the Powder River and
Billings Resource Management Plans (SEIS). The SEIS is
being conducted by order of the U.S. District Court for the
District of Montana. The SEIS will evaluate the effects of
phased Coal
Bed Natural
Gas (CBNG)
development
within the
Billings and
Powder
River Resource Management
Plan (RMP)
areas. The
SEIS will
also incorporate the cuTypical CBNG well heads located in a cluster in Southmulative
impacts as- eastern Montana near Decker.
sociated with
the proposed Tongue River Railroad, analyze the effect of
private water well mitigation agreements for alleviating the
impacts from methane migration and groundwater drawdown, and update the public on the results of monitoring
since the 2003 document was approved.
SEIS Project Newsletter
SEIS Planning Area
The planning area: Big Horn Carbon, Carter, Custer, Golden Valley,
Musselshell, Powder River, Rosebud , Stillwater, Sweet Grass,
Treasure, Wheatland, and Yellowstone counties.
American Indian Reservations
Powder River RMP
Powder River Geologic Basin
Billings RMP Area
Alternative Development Collaboration
An alternative development meeting was held with Cooperating Agencies and other collaborators on September 21,
2005 in Miles City. During the meeting an overview of all
suggested phased development alternatives received during scoping: numerical, geographical, geological, and temEPA, Dept of Energy,
poral were discussed with the participants. The participants
BIA, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, then provided phased development elements that should be
MT DEQ, MT Board included in the analysis. Three draft alternatives were developed. Following the meeting, the three alternatives
of Oil & Gas
were combined into an internal “Draft Phased DevelopConservation,
ment Alternative” and distributed to the Cooperating
Crow Tribe,
Northern Cheyenne Agencies and Collaborators for comment. As a result of
Tribe, Lower Brule the comments and further consideration of scoping comSioux Tribe,
ments, BLM revised the alternative to address several isCounties: Big Horn, sues such as the numerical approval of Applications for
Carbon, Golden
Permit Drill (APDs) annually, preservation of habitat, proValley, Powder
tection of surface water quality, Reservation buffer zone,
River, Rosebud,
and geographical distribution of CBNG wells on a waterand Yellowstone
shed basis. That alternative is presented in this newsletter
for your review as the “Phased Development Alternative—
Page 2
Multiple Screens.”
Cooperating
Agencies and Collaborators in the
SEIS:
Volume 1, Issue 1
Phased Development Alternative —
Under this Alternative, development of CBNG on federal
leases in the Billings and Powder River RMP areas would be Multiple
done in a phased manner through restrictions imposed by
Screens
BLM. BLM would limit the number of federal applications
for permits to drill (APDs) that could be approved each year
cumulatively and in each 4th Order watershed. BLM would
also limit the percentage of disturbance on BLM surface or on
private surface overlying federal minerals within each 4th Or
der watershed. Finally, BLM would also place a limit on the
volume of untreated water that could be discharged to surface
waters from all federal CBNG wells within each 4th Order wa
tershed. The 4th order watershed level was adopted for this
alternative because it provides a geographic perspective that is
consistent with the analysis completed for the 2003 FEIS and
is appropriate for the SEIS analysis. See the Map on Page 6 for
depictions of the 4th order watersheds within the planning
area.
Example of 4th
order watershed
limit:
In the Middle
Powder water
shed 2,206 total
APDs are pre
dicted to be
drilled. The
The cumulative limit placed on federal APDs would be based RFD indicates
that 12% of the
on 5% (910 wells) of the total number of state, private, and
federal wells (18,225 wells) predicted to be drilled in the RMP total APDs
areas, as identified in the Reasonably Foreseeable Develop
would be ap
ment (RFD) scenario in the 2003 FEIS. This means that if the proved in year
total (private, state, federal) number of APDs issued at any
4, thus 265 total
time during a given year exceeds 910, then the BLM would
APDs could be
not issue any additional APDs that year. The 5 percent limit
approved in this
was chosen to level the pace of development over a 20 year
watershed that
period and to apply a numerical limit to federal APD approv
year. Based on
als.
the RFD predic
The BLM would also limit its approval of APDs each year
tions for state
within each 4th Order Watershed. This limit would be based on
the total number of wells (state, private and federal) predicted and private
for each watershed times the predicted rate of development in wells (133
wells), the BLM
the 2003 document (Figure Min-4). Therefore, cumulative
APDs per year per watershed would not exceed that percent
could approve
age. However if this percentage were to reduce the number of up to 132 APDs
wells to below 50 wells/watershed it would be suspended and in this water
50 wells/watershed would be considered the limit for that wa shed in year 4.
Page 3
tershed that year to allow the opportunity to
develop an economically viable project.
SEIS Project Newsletter
PDA-Multiple Screens continued
The Reasonably
Foreseeable
Development
Scenario
predicted
18,225 state,
private and
federal wells to
be drilling in
the Billings
(2590 wells)
and Powder
River (15,635
wells) RMPs
over the next 20
years.
Page 4
BLM would also limit the amount of disturbed habitat on BLM
surface or on private surface overlying federal minerals within
each 4th Order watershed. A threshold expressed in terms of
percentage of disturbed habitat would be based on the potential
to affect species of special concern from habitat fragmentation
related impacts. BLM would use identified wildlife habitat to
develop this criterion during the analysis for the SEIS. Areas
would no longer be considered to be disturbed once the required vegetation has become established. For analysis purposes it is assumed that re-vegetation would require approximately 2 years following seeding.
The combined numerical limits for cumulative and watershed
development, coupled with the disturbed habitat limit would
necessitate a varied geographical development pattern across
the RMPs. It is foreseen that only a few watersheds would be
developed in the initial three to five year period, (Upper
Tongue, Lower Tongue, Middle Powder, Little Powder) while
the remaining watersheds would most likely be developed in
later years.
BLM would also limit the volume of untreated water that
could be discharged to surface waters from federal CBNG
wells within each 4th Order watershed. This volume would be
based on 10% of the 7Q10 flow as calculated from all CBNG
wells at the down stream end of the watershed. If state and
private wells use the entire 10%, no discharge of untreated
water produced by federal wells would be allowed into that
particular drainage. All other federally produced water would
need to be reinjected, treated, or put to beneficial use.
Within 5 miles of the Northern Cheyenne and Crow Indian
reservations site specific groundwater and air analysis would
be required to be included with the operator’s Plan of Development (POD) submissions. The operator’s analyses needs to
demonstrate if Indian Trust Assets would be impacted from
development of federal CBNG wells and provide protection
for these assets. If the analysis does not show protection of
Trust Assets, BLM would not approve the APD. Monitoring
wells and air monitoring stations may be required to be installed between the development area and the reservations.
Volume 1, Issue 1
PDA-Multiple Screens continued
If monitoring indicates that Trust Assets are not being protected, wells would be shut in. If CBNG development occurs
on a Reservation, this requirement may be modified in consul- BLM Planning
area consists of
tation with the Tribe and other affected parties.
The BLM restrictions would apply only to BLM administered
leases. Development on private and state leases would be managed by the Montana Board of Oil and Gas Conservation. For
analysis purposes, it is assumed that development of other
leases (state, private, Indian and underlying US Forest Service
surface) would continue at the rate predicted in the 2003 FEIS.
The current rate of development (555 producing wells) is near
the 2003 RFD’s year 1 prediction. Therefore, the SEIS analysis will begin at year 2.
BLM would continue to implement the concept of Adaptive
Management by using data from studies, monitoring and inspections to guide approvals of federal lease operations. Plan
of development requirements, the use of state and federal permits, lease stipulations, as well as the use of surface owner
agreements and other management actions described in Alternative E of the 2003 FEIS would also be features of this alternative.
What is a watershed?
“Watershed” is the term
used to describe the
geographic area of land
that drains water to a
shared destination.
Page 5
roughly 1.5
million acres of
BLM managed
surface, 5.0
million acres of
BLM managed
mineral estate
including 3.2
million acres of
BLM managed
oil and gas
resources
Within the
Powder River
and Billings
RMP areas there
are predicted to
be 7,716 and
751 CBNG wells
respectively on
BLM Minerals.
Total predicted
BLM APDs
8,465.
4th Order Watersheds
4th Order Watersheds
Bureau of Land Management
Page 6
Volume 1, Issue 1
Request for Comments
The BLM would like your comments regarding this
Multiple Screen Phased Development Alternative.
Please provide comments regarding the phasing approach, numerical limits, resource screening triggers, or
geographic development pattern to the following
address:
BLM
Miles City Field Office
SEIS—PDA Comments
P.O. Box 219
Miles City, Montana, 59301
Comments received after October 31, 2005 will be incorporated in the next SEIS milestone.
Note
Please submit
your comments
regarding this
Multiple
Screens Phased
Development
Alternative by
October 31,
2005.
SEIS Project Milestone Schedule
August/
The SEIS Project schedule is 18 months from July 2005 – December 2006
Page 7
Miles City Field Office
ATTN: Jon Seekins
111 Garryowen Road
Miles City, Montana 59301
Presorted Std. Mail
U.S. Postage Paid
Billings, Montana
Permit No. 205